GNSS Geodetic Control Standards and Specifications Gregory A. Helmer, PLS

GNSS Geodetic Control Standards
and Specifications
Joint Publication of:
The California Land Surveyors Association | California Spatial Reference Center
Presented by: Gregory A. Helmer, PLS
GNSS Surveying Standards & Specifications
GNSS Surveying Standards & Specifications
Joint Tasks Force & Publication Authors
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Gregory A. Helmer, Chairman
Art Andrew
Curtis Burfield
Kimberley Holtz
Rich Maher
Armand Marois
Michael McGee
Keith Ream
Joshua Tremba
GNSS Surveying Standards & Specifications
Key Reference Publications
FGDC-STD-007.2-1998, Geospatial Positioning Accuracy Standards, Part 2: Standards for Geodetic
Networks http://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standards-projects/accuracy/part2/chapter2
Caltrans 2013, Global Positioning System (GPS) Survey Specifications
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/row/landsurveys/SurveysManual/06_Surveys.pdf
Natural Resources Canda 2013, Guidelines for RTK/RTN GNSS Surveying in Canada
ftp://ftp.nrcan.gc.ca/ess/sgb_pub/CS/Canada%20RTK_UserGuide_v1%201_EN.pdf
Colorado DOT 2008, Survey Manual Chapter 3 GPS/GNSS Surveys
http://www.coloradodot.info/business/manuals/survey/chapter-3/chapter3.pdf/at_download/file
Conneticut Association of Land Surveyors 2008, Guidelines and Specifications for Global Navigation Satellite
System Land Surveys in Connecticut http://ctsurveyors.org/wpcontent/uploads/2010/12/GNSS_20080626_online.pdf
Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors 2010, Guidelines for the use of GNSS in land surveying and mapping
http://www.cnavgnss.com/uploads/Guidelines_for_the_use_of_GNSS_in_surveying_and_mapping.pdf
Washington State Department of Natural Resources 2004, GPS Guide Book Standards and Guidelines for
Land Surveying Using Global Positioning System Methods
http://www.wsrn3.org/CONTENT/Reference/Reference_GPS-Guidebook-WADNR.pdf
Accuracy Standards
Positional Accuracy
The volume space for positional accuracy is a
simplified model representing horizontal and
vertical confidence. It is centered on the
adjusted point, scaled to 95% confidence, and
bounded by upper and lower planes of vertical
confidence of a given height component and
the radius of the horizontal confidence.
For most practical purposes, the semi-major
axis of the error ellipse can be adopted as the
horizontal radius of confidence.
Since horizontal and vertical are correlated
dimensions derived from the GNSS Cartesian
coordinate frame, the cylindrical volume space
is statistically conservative.
Accuracy Standards
Proposed Accuracy Classifications
Classification
95% Confidence Region
Meters
1-Millimeter
≤ 0.001
2-Millimeter
≤ 0.002
0.5 cm
1 cm
2 cm
5 cm
10 cm
≤ 0.005
≤ 0.01
≤ 0.02
≤ 0.05
≤ 0.1
2-Decimeter
≤ 0.2
5-Decimeter
≤ 0.5
1-Meter
≤1
2-Meter
≤2
5-Meter
≤5
Notes
Feet
Outside the scope of these specifications.
≤ 0.016
≤ 0.033
≤ 0.066
≤ 0.164
≤ 0.328
Horizontal and vertical accuracy
classifications included in these
standards and specifications.
Outside the scope of these specifications.
Network versus Local Accuracy
Network Accuracy is intended to measure the relationship between the control point
in question, and the datum.
Local Accuracy measures the positional accuracy relative to other points within the
same network.
§
§
§
§
Constrained Network Adjustment
Weighted Constraints
Adopt Major Axis of 95% Ellipse
95% Confidence Error Bar
(Augment for geoid model if applicable)
§ The difference between the relative ellipse versus
position ellipse is typically insignificant.
Therefore: Network Accuracy
Testing Procedures
Independent testing from a source of higher accuracy is
the preferred test for all forms of geospatial data
1. All observation errors must have been reduced to only random and normal uncertainties.
Any systematic errors, blunders, or misclosures outside of a normal distribution, invalidate
the statistical premise of least squares, and therefore must be eliminated.
2. The observations must have sufficient redundancy to trap outliers and distribute random
errors. Care must be taken to insure that observations are truly independent in their
redundancy, not merely in quantity.
3. A valid weighting strategy must be developed and applied to the observation data.
§ Redundant Observations of Higher Quality
§ Validate to Redundant Published Control
§ Independent Solutions: Software, Satellite
Constellations, Observable Frequencies
Documentation
Signed and Sealed Project Report
§ Geodetic control surveying is protected as the practice of
Professional Land Surveying in California (Cal. BPC §
Chapter 15, Article 3, 8726(f)
§ A narrative description of the project
§ Observation Campaign
§ Processing Performed
§ Summary of Results, Including Testing Performed
§ Coordinate Listing Always Including Metadata
Never issue only North,East,Elevation,Description
Best Practices - Guidelines
GNSS Surveying Standards & Specifications
Network Applications
Accuracy Classification
Horizontal
Vertical
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and Asset Inventory
10 cm
10 cm
Planning-Level Photogrammetric Ground Control (5-foot contours)
5 cm
10 cm
Design-Level Photogrammetric Ground Control (1-foot contours)
2 cm
5 cm
Right of Way and Boundary Determination
1 cm
10 cm
Project Control for Design and Construction
1 cm
1 cm
Regional High-Precision Geodetic Horizontal Networks
1 cm
2 cm
Regional High-Precision Geodetic Vertical Networks
1 cm
1 cm
Ultra-High-Precision Networks and Deformation Monitoring
0.5 cm
0.5 cm
Best Practices Network Design
Goals and Objective Focused
§ Existing Control and
Geoid Slope
§ Ionosphere and
Troposphere Models
§ Velocity Modeling
§ Error Modeling or
Error Distribution
Best Practices Network Design
Gerald Mader’s Guiding Principals
Arguments for: Hub Network Design
§ “Precision is independent of baseline length”
§ “Precision depends on observation span”
§ “Session network designs must include both
short and long baseline lengths”
§ “GNSS measurement errors are independent,
they do not propagate through a network”
§ “Relative positions must be with respect to a
single reference mark or reference network”
OPUS Projects
Best Practices Network Design
Loop vs. Hub Networks
Distributes (smears) observation and/or
constraint errors across network.
Artificially imposes correlations between
stations.
Preserves observation precision.
Short and long lines improve tropospheric
modeling.
Bench mark errors lost in single vector.
Best Practices Network Design
Trivial vs. Non-Trivial Networks
Best Practices Network Design
Stable Control Survey Monuments
** Usability and Permanence **
§ 3D Deep Rod Monuments
§ Disk in Rock or Concrete Structure
§ 30” Minimum Manufactured Monument
§ 2” Minimum Iron Pipe and Disk
Best Practices Network Design
Stable Control Survey Monuments
Best Practices Data Collection
Horizontal
Horizontal
Horizontal
Vertical
Vertical
Vertical
.5 cm-2 cm
2 cm-5 cm
5 cm-10 cm
.5 cm-2 cm
2 cm-5 cm
5 cm-10 cm
Two times:
100%
100%
80%
100%
100%
80%
Three or more times:
10%
10%
0%
50%
25%
0%
60 min.
45 min.
20 min.
120 min.
60 min.
45 min.
Minimum number of satellites observed during 75% of
occupation:
7
6
5
8
7
5
Maximum PDOP during 75% of occupation:
3
4
5
3
4
5
3 mm
5 mm
7 mm
5 mm
5 mm
7 mm
Y
Y
N
Y
N
N
5 mm
5mm
5 mm
3 mm
5 mm
5 mm
Number of independent antenna height measurements
per occupation:
2
2
2
2
2
2
Digital Photograph (location and close up) required for
each mark occupation:
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Fixed Height Tripod Recommended:
N
N
N
Y
Y
Y
Table 3
Spatial Accuracy Classification
Repeat Station Observations
percent of number of stations
Sidereal time displacement between occupations (start
time to next start):
Satellite Constellation Mask
Antenna Setup
Maximum centering error (measured and phase center):
Independent plumb point check required:
Maximum height error (measured and phase center):
Caltrans
Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors
Best Practices Data Processing
Traditional Differential GNSS Surveying
§
§
§
§
§
§
Initial Position Accuracy
GNSS Orbits and Clocks
Atmosphere Error Reduction
Baseline Processing
Least Squares Processing
Adjustment Analysis
Height Determination
Height Systems
Ellipsoid Heights The direct expression of geodetic positions in terms of the
chosen geodetic datum. California Geodetic Coordinates (CA Business and
Professions Code).
NAVD88 Orthometric Heights The realization on the ground of a national network
of precise leveling and sophisticated (for the era) processing and analysis. Neither
geocentric nor consistent in terms of geodetic science.
Geopotential Heights Future official system of elevations for North America,
based exclusively upon a gravimetric geoid model and adopted zero datum
equipotential surface.
Local Elevation Systems Include NGVD29, tidal datum (e.g. Mean Sea Level, Mean
Lower Low Water, etc.), NGVD29, and some local-agency-maintained bench mark
networks.
Height Determination
NAVD88
or
Local Heights
Geocentric Global Datum
Earth-Centered, Geopotential Datum
ITRFxx → Vel
oc
i
t
y
Model
→ Pr
oj
econ
Zero Elevation = 62,636,856.00 m2/s2
Geocentric Global Datum
Orthometric height is the distance from the geoid to a point along a line normal
to the equipotential of the gravity field. Therefore the value is correctly
computed along a curved plumb line. To do so requires knowledge of the
potential gravity at every point along the plumb line.
Geocentric Global Datum
Orthometric Height Conundrum
The lines Wi are equipotential surfaces
with W0 being the geoid or datum
surface. The orthometric height at
Points P1 and P2 are the distances along
the plumb line between W0 the datum
and W8 the equipotential surface of the
lake, and are properly computed by the
formula:
H1 = (W8 – W0) / g’1
H2 = (W8 – W0) / g’2
Where g’i = the mean gravity along the respective plumb line
Since equipotential surfaces converge to the north in the northern hemisphere,
due to the decrease in centrifugal force, H1 > H2.
Disruptive Innovation PPP
Precise Point Positioning
Questions & Answers
Statement of Qualifications
A Winning Approach